HOME 
You will know how buggy and terrible the alpha will perform, its not a demo for A3.Originally Posted by Leon86
You will know how buggy and terrible the alpha will perform, its not a demo for A3.
Okay, thanks for help here, but I figured it out myself: The lag was exclusively caused by Anti-Aliasing. I don't know why, but it seems like it can't handle it in Arma... everything else can be very high and run at 30fps, but the smallest AA is causing bad lag :/
Given your modest rig, here are a few more tweaks that should help you get A2 running smoothly yet looking good:
http://forums.bistudio.com/showthrea...66#post2081466
I highly question which "modern games" can run at high settings on a GT 230.
Core i7 920 @ 3.995 GHz, HT off
12 GB OCZ DDR3-1600
GTX 680
2x Intel X25-M 80 GB SSD
Windows 7 Pro x64
ArmA2/OA Settings:
1920x1080 w/ View Distance at ~3600
Video Memory at Default
MSAA Very High, AToC=0, SMAA Ultra
Post Processing at Very Low
All other settings at Very High
Left4Dead 2 at the fullest, Crysis Warhead at regular high...
It's not like I'm talking about Battlefield 3 or Crysis 2 here.
Ah, okay. Yeah, those games are 4-5 years old so I guess my definition of "modern" is different from yours.
I guess ArmA 2 is technically 4 years old too, but it was pretty hard to run it at high settings when it came out. Only in recent times can we really start getting up there.
I bought ArmA 2:CO a few days ago, and when I played it I discovered that I could only play with all settings on the lowest to play without much lag. I used "Can You RUN It" and I met, maybe even exceeded the system requirements for both games.
My specs are:
CPU:Intel Core I5-2450m 2.5GHz
Graphics Card: nVidiA 610M
RAM: 8 GB
Can anyone tell me how to run this better?
cant. that gpu is pretty much on minimum requirements.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-...M.63759.0.html
it scores around 4500 points on 3dmark06, the recommended for arma 2 is an 8800GT which will score about 11000 points. and even that will only get you good fps on 1280x720 on medium.
Arma 3 is a twitchshooter
Needs more rainbow six 1-3
Just going to let you guys know, if you're near trees or bushes... your GPU will be put to the test. This causes -20 FPS to your video game, secondly... it can be even WORSE if you have Post Processing enabled. The reason being is that Ambient Occlusion (SSAO) is sort of a tested beta feature of ArmA II. And it isn't well optimized to be on the game even for people with good enough computers in the first place. So firstly, put your Terrain detail on Very Low or Low and you'll notice an extra boost of performance very fast. Secondly put your Post Processing off and you'll notice a severe increase of performance there too. It seems that Terrain Grass, Trees and Bushes don't get along too well with the Post Processing.
My FPS stays at 50+ and sometimes up at 80's. But with Terrain Detail higher than low, and Post Processing on past Low... I'll immediately drop to 30FPS and lower. Just giving you guys a heads up, Post Processing and Terrain Detail are most likely your Graphical problems. You can use Anti Aliasing but you also have to realize your Anti Aliasing wont look 'as' good as it would with Anti Aliasing Post Processing enabled... so if you can find a comfortable range of Post Processing... you should have your self set
Terrain Detail is tricky because it does make a large performance difference, but it also makes a MASSIVE difference in visual quality. Basically if you go below High (IMO) you are getting into territory where everything looks like flat dirt carpet.
Reply With Quote
